You are on page 1of 10

TFS-18470; No of Pages 10

Technological Forecasting & Social Change xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Technological Forecasting & Social Change

3D printing and the third mission: The university in the materialization of


intellectual capital
Thomas Birtchnell a,⁎, Tillmann Böhme b, Robert Gorkin c
a
School of Geography and Sustainable Communities, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong, Australia
b
School of Management, Operations and Marketing, Faculty of Business, University of Wollongong, Australia
c
ARC Centre of Excellence for Electromaterials Science, Intelligent Polymer Research Institute (IPRI), University of Wollongong, Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The production, diffusion and preservation of knowledge are the main goals of universities, which are critical
Received 30 September 2015 nodes for mediating intellectual capital. In recent years, 3D printing (additive manufacturing) technologies are
Received in revised form 21 January 2016 emerging as a possible disruptive or transformative force in the knowledge economy and by extension the
Accepted 18 March 2016
material economy as consumers are given the affordance of materializing information into real-world objects.
Available online xxxx
To understand the role universities will play in this potential convergence of the material and knowledge econ-
Keywords:
omies, this paper surveys current levels of involvement of tertiary institutions in 3D printing. The paper projects
Triple helix how the materialization of data will affect a range of social dynamics for creators-cum-consumers at different
Additive manufacturing scales: community, region and nation-state and applies case studies to the multilevel perspective (MLP) frame-
Multilevel perspective (MLP) work. Studies are considered in three empirical cases: Berlin in Germany, Lancashire in the United Kingdom, and
Innovation systems the United States. The research indicates that the National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute (NAMII)
Prototyping ‘America Makes’ Program is a top-down knowledge dissemination program for 3D printing. In contrast, the UK
Lancaster University Product Development Unit (LPDU) is a 3D-printing value-network, which has developed
organically over a decade of operation. Fablab Berlin is a local initiative loosely coupled with industry and tertiary
education providers. The paper proposes a future-oriented conceptual framework to capture a variety of present-
day university engagements with additive manufacturing in terms of intellectual capital.
© 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction is for a university to operate in a similar fashion to a business. Akin to


businesses, universities—that is, once the mission is met—will have cli-
ents, assets, shareholders and wealth creation. Highly ranked universi-
ties already produce a lion's share of the world's intellectual capital.
Already, we've been able to get 80 cities to commit to working in a
The problem for many of them is how to capitalize on this knowledge
public–private partnership to generate more manufacturing efforts
in order to yield a profit. Although research that produces intellectual
in their respective cities. We've created four high-tech advanced
capital is a form of knowledge production universities must operate
manufacturing hubs, and we have budgeted to create a whole lot
more entrepreneurially in order to secure value from their efforts, or
more around the country. And some of it has to do with advanced
so the mission statement goes. In harvesting and reaping information
materials, some of it has to do with 3D printing. The idea is, we start
universities are lead participants then in the ‘knowledge economy’.
building an ecosystem, a network of companies, universities, re-
As the quotation from US President Barack Obama at the beginning
searchers, and entrepreneurs, all of whom start really focusing and
of this section shows, governments—also under pressure to operate
becoming experts on a particular facet of industries of the future.
more like businesses in this neoliberal era—are advocates of this mission
too and channel resources into public universities in order to realize the
(Hudson, 2014: no pagination)
goal of wealth creation. Universities make profit as businesses primarily
In this article we consider the materialization of intellectual capital. through ‘spin-off’ companies from patents and marketable ideas. But
As academics reading this article will most likely know from their own benefactors and beneficiaries alike are now realizing that if universities
institutional experiences, universities in the twenty-first century under- truly seek to invoke wealth creation, as their driving modus operandi,
stand themselves to be driven by a ‘third mission’. In short, the mission they will also need to participate in the material economy too. Their ac-
tivities will need to stretch beyond simply providing graduate training
⁎ Corresponding author.
and research patents for companies to nurture and bring to fruition.
E-mail addresses: thomas_birtchnell@uow.edu.au (T. Birtchnell), The concept of a third mission is also known as the triple helix: a tri-
tillmann_bohme@uow.edu.au (T. Böhme), robert_gorkin@uow.edu.au (R. Gorkin). umvirate combining university, industry and government (Leydesdorff,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.014
0040-1625/© 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Birtchnell, T., et al., 3D printing and the third mission: The university in the materialization of intellectual capital,
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.014
2 T. Birtchnell et al. / Technological Forecasting & Social Change xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

1996). Academic studies of this helix emphasize that communication process typically involves not only access and understanding of infra-
between the distinct entities is vital for the equitable transfer of innova- structure, materials supply and specialized software, but also requires
tion going forward (Leydesdorff and Etzkowitz, 1998). According to significant knowledge in design (to model the engineering of the final
Stanford University's Triple Helix Research Group, the thesis behind structure, scaffolding and the printability correctly and effectively)
the concept is ‘that the potential for innovation and economic develop- and further finishing (as objects typically need post treatments or
ment in a Knowledge Society lies in a more prominent role for the uni- cleaning).
versity and in the hybridization of elements from university, industry In order to examine the future of the university in a world where 3D
and government to generate new institutional and social formats for printing is ubiquitous, we first summarize in the next section the
the production, transfer and application of knowledge’ (Triple Helix existing presence of 3D printing in the university system. In section
Research Group, 2014: no pagination). So it is not just universities need- two, we provide detail to our hypothesis that there is a convergence of
ing to undergo change—it is the entire triumvirate. No less than a the material and knowledge economies with 3D printing. In section
systemic ‘socio-technical’ transition. three, we outline the methods for the case studies in this paper and
In this article we consider the theme of this special issue from the the conceptual framework of the multilevel perspective (MLP). In sec-
perspective of the future of mass-production, -distribution and tion four, we provide three examples from the present in order to ‘pro-
-consumption—that is, the ‘material economy’—and its possible future totype’ different futures for the university in light of 3D printing using
convergence with the ‘knowledge economy’ in light of the dramatic abstract models and the MLP. Finally, we discuss the impacts of these
social change foreseen in the materialization of data due to the mass different models on the social dynamics of intellectual capital as materi-
adoption of 3D printers (Ratto and Ree, 2012). 3D printers are already alized knowledge.
an interface between these two economies in materializing intellectual 3D printing is most advantageous in market environments charac-
capital in the pre-production ‘rapid prototyping’ phase. Industrial de- terized by demand for customization, flexibility, design complexity,
signers make use of these technologies for prototyping single instances and high transportation costs for the delivery of end products (Weller
of test models quickly and cheaply before their designs are sent to facto- et al., 2015: 45). How does 3D printing fits into the so-called ‘third mis-
ries for bulk volume manufacturing. Increasingly ‘rapid manufacturing’ sion’ (Laredo, 2007) of universities—that is, in engagement with society
is becoming the norm as custom parts in limited instances of finished beyond research and teaching? To answer this research question we
products: automobiles, aeroplanes and other products made in minimal consider the convergence of the material and knowledge economies
batches (Hopkinson et al., 2006). through this new technological innovation that materializes digital
The notion that the knowledge economy could converge with the data in a ‘world-transforming’ way (D'Aveni, 2013). Since the mid-
material economy was intimated by a special section of this journal twentieth century tertiary institutions underwent a transformation
guest edited by Fred Phillips and Manabu Eto titled ‘Revitalizing Univer- from being opaque, privileged ‘ivory towers’ to becoming transparent,
sity Research and its Contribution to Society’ in the 1990s. A key finding open-for-business ‘skyscrapers’, both symbolically and in some cases
from that special issue was that in the future ‘other new kinds of institu- literally (Etzkowitz et al., 2000). There are vocal critics of this push for
tions will be needed to foster transfer of university research to society’ a third mission and new ‘social contract’ between universities and
(Phillips, 1998: 260). One particular phenomenon the special issue's their outreach targets, whether it is industry or government or both
guest editors flagged as demanding future inquiry was the ‘hollowing (Vavakova, 1998). In line with this special issue's mandate, we ask:
out of industry’ (Phillips and Eto, 1998: 207). how do universities make use of knowledge exchange with other
In the spirit of this special issue we argue that in light of 3D printing parties to shape society?
the material economy represents an area of engagement for universi-
ties, particularly in post-industrial states that have ‘lost’ capacity in 2. Universities as 3D printing hotbeds
manufacturing despite efforts towards ‘leanness’ and flexibility. Instead
these states have become overtly services-focused catering to At first glance, the materialization of intellectual capital would seem
consumers of products mostly made in offshored manufacturing clus- to be the polar opposite of the focus of this special issue, namely, the
ters and transported long distances by global logistics industries to be knowledge economy and universities. Not so, in fact universities—as
stored in bulk inventories. With the emergence of new technologies producers, diffusers and preservers of new knowledge—are inching
that do not necessarily interface closely with the current production– ever closer to the material economy due to the emergence in recent
distribution–consumption triad, such as 3D printing, there are opportu- years of 3D printing within research centres, design schools, laborato-
nities for universities in post-industrial states to fill the gaps left by past ries and even academic libraries. Indeed, university libraries are the
waves of offshoring and ‘servicization’ (Foresight, 2010; Urry, 2014). forerunners in the convergence between material and informational in-
Much previous research in this journal shows that many innovative tellectual capital (Scalfani and Sahib, 2013). Invariably this innovation is
technologies reach the market through collaborations of industry, in response to demand from engineering and design students for rapid
government and university across differing scales and degrees. In the prototyping tools. However, many institutions are taking this on board
nanobiopharmaceutical sector university–industry patent collaboration in a similar fashion to the provision of centralized paper printing ser-
is proving fruitful (Guan and Zhao, 2013). In the innovation of nano vices by purchasing and making available 3D printers to all students,
materials there is evidence the global corporation Samsung collaborates staff and researchers (Pryor, 2014). Others, such as Dalhousie Universi-
extensively with Korea's major universities (Ozcan and Islam, 2014). We ty, are innovating across the 3D printing ecosystem by establishing
suggest that, in the same fashion as these examples, 3D printers will online repositories of intellectual capital in the form of 3D model file
become ubiquitous due to a convergence of the material and knowledge collections (Groenendyk and Gallant, 2013).
economies within the collaborative relationships of the triple helix. 3D printing, known more formally as additive manufacturing, has
A range of commercial and custom printing instrumentation is now had a renaissance in the last decade due to the commercialization of
available that can print a variety of printed objects from polymers, consumer level, mostly thermo-plastic extrusion, technologies and the
resins, metals and even biomaterials (so called bio-printing). There is consolidation of metal sintering in industry settings for end-user parts
also an expanding ecosystem where the technologies are used in a dis- and products (D'Aveni, 2015). In part, 3D printers have become main-
tributed manner: in small businesses and in the home for the personal stream due to the introduction of open-source technologies to the con-
production of mostly plastic prototypes (Amis and Silk, 2010). The com- sumer market; the recent demise of patents for metal 3D printing
monality in the spectrum of 3D printing is the ability to take a digitally suggests further innovation, marketization and systematization of the
created object, and using a given layer-by-layer building technique, technology for a broader range of products (Intellectual Property
recreate that object in a physical form. It is critical to note that this Office, 2013). A spate of start-up companies now offer consumer-level

Please cite this article as: Birtchnell, T., et al., 3D printing and the third mission: The university in the materialization of intellectual capital,
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.014
T. Birtchnell et al. / Technological Forecasting & Social Change xxx (2016) xxx–xxx 3

units to the public drawing on freely available designs, notably the much freight and retail in the process—this is a systemic consequence
‘Reprap’ (Söderberg, 2014). However, 3D printing's origins go back al- beyond simply high volume manufacturing (Birtchnell and Urry,
most 40 years, when engineers were looking for better ways of 2012). For instance, cost advantages are foreseeable in production pro-
prototyping designs in industry (Wong and Hernandez, 2012). Since cesses with efficiencies impacting set up, waste, quality control and
that era the field has matured and expanded to include an ever- labour; however, efficiencies are also impactful in distribution, with
growing suite of specialized equipment, printable materials and print- the reduction or elimination of final product inventories and freight,
ing technologies (Moilanen and Vadén, 2013). and in consumption, with the ability for individuals to mass produce
Studies of the impacts of teleconferencing and telecommunications customized products (Bak, 2003).
technologies show they do not simply substitute for transport demand A key limitation of the 3D printing process for final version post-
(Mokhtarian, 1988; Mokhtarian, 2002). The same conclusions are appli- production (and not prototype) products is the high specific costs of
cable to 3D printing, which will not simply substitute for transportation the main current ‘high end’ contender technologies—that is, electron
in the current system of production, distribution and consumption. beam melting and direct metal laser sintering—in comparison to more
There is, however, the possibility that 3D printing could ‘decouple’ conventional processes found on bulk factory assembly lines: injection
transport from object procurement (Sims et al., 2014). Chiefly, the dis- moulding and machining (Baumers et al., 2016). It makes little econom-
ruption will be through the decentralization of the means of production ic sense to simply restock large-scale factories with clusters of 3D
to consumers either in their homes or close by in dedicated facilities and printers expecting the same or better cost advantages as the current
service providers—‘bureaus’, in current terminology (Kietzmann et al., system of production regardless of the efficiency gains in waste, quality
2015). Competition from decentralized personal production will have control and labour. Moreover, many innovations in these three areas
geographical and geopolitical implications as global supply chains and that apply to 3D printing, such as robotics, are in some cases applicable
global production networks face change (Gress and Kalafsky, 2015). to machining and moulding making these more cost effective too.
While there is the capacity for 3D printing to make the current 3D printing is a social phenomenon and is a core feature in rhetoric
system more efficient and hence sustainable, such goals would re- about a next phase of industrial revolution (Berman, 2012). Estimations
quire a systemic overhaul to achieve economies of scale (Gebler of this revolution understand it to be ‘decentralized’ since manufactur-
et al., 2014). Therefore, there are many key limits to the technology ing no longer takes place in regional production clusters, but in
preventing its painless integration in current production systems homes, offices, stores and, presumably, universities (Banerjee, 2015).
(Holweg, 2015). In considering the potential ubiquity of 3D printing A chief reason for tertiary institutions to transform into production
in light of its limits, we argue that it is ‘the balance between the and knowledge nodes within a decentralized industrial revolution is
interlocking networks of markets and the attractiveness of the tech- that they represent storehouses of intellectual capital with network
nologies for users’ that will play a vital role in its mass adoption links to local businesses, communities and citizens.
(Dolfsma and Leydesdorff, 2009). Previous research in this journal As we have so far established, 3D printing is not going to revolution-
on technology push and economies of scale in 3D printing shows ize the manufacturing sector as it stands today (Holweg, 2015).
that ‘system productivity is not sufficient for the adoption of [addi- Business-as-usual with 3D printing is unlikely. However, this does not
tive manufacturing] in high volume manufacturing applications’ appear to be hindering the growth of the sector. On the contrary, one
(Baumers et al., 2016: 201). Instead, commentators foresee the role of the aspects of 3D printing that most excites commentators is its flex-
of consumers—as well as small to medium enterprises—shifting to ibility, namely, its ability to materialize intellectual capital in a method
become more like producers: so-called ‘prosumers’ (Ritzer and that is entirely unlike assembly-line mass manufacturing (D'Aveni,
Jurgenson, 2010). Idealistically, such digital makers will participate 2015). If it does become mainstream there are likely to be consequences
partly or wholly in the design and manufacture of objects, although for the entire system of manufacturing, distribution and indeed con-
the reality is likely to be less seamless given the learning curves in- sumption. In this sense we suggest that 3D printing will produce social
herent in the technology (Anderson, 2012). Some foresee no less dynamics that are entirely novel and in many cases disruptive. Already
than a ‘new industrial revolution’ involving the integration of ser- estimates are being made that the global 3D printing market will reach
vices and goods (Tien, 2012). Others are more ambivalent about approximately $US3 billion by 2018 according to the executive summa-
the emancipation of consumers with uncertainties present in ry of the report ‘3D Printing—A Global Strategic Business Report’ by
people's capacities to actually desire to print (Bosqué, 2015). Not- Global Industry Analysts (Raby, 2012).
withstanding the participation of consumers, such a shift would en- While industry is playing a key role in the expansion of 3D printing
tail radical upheavals for current social orders and requires policy beyond rapid prototyping, universities have a significant role to play
foresight (Sissons and Thompson, 2012). Survey data shows con- in evolving the 3D printing ecosystem. As this paper shows, universities
sumers are willing to engage with 3D printers and the community will act as knowledge clusters for 3D printing and will offer multiple op-
is growing as the technology matures (Moilanen and Vadén, 2013). portunities for the broader industrial and consumer sectors and the
We do not propose that 3D printers are set to eat universities from local community itself.
the inside out in a grassroots fashion, so to speak, even at the smallest
scale platforms, instead interconnectedness is plausible (Gansky,
2015). Universities, as connected entities, will be mediators between 3. Conceptual framework and methodology
3D printing and associated technologies and consumers. In the process
they will offset the risks involved with simply using these machines in 3D printing plays a catalysing role in roadmaps and scenarios of the
the home environment. These risks include both intellectual property future of manufacturing (Birtchnell and Urry, 2015; Potstada and
issues and personal safety ones, regulations on both ‘depend on central- Zybura, 2014; Tucker et al., 2014). The conceptual framework of this
ized manufacturing assumptions’ (Neely, 2015). Universities become paper is the academic field of ‘transitions research’ in particular the
hubs, partners or incubators in the convergent knowledge and material MLP: a tried-and-tested method in transitions studies. Case studies
economy of the twenty-first century. Universities are consequently were drawn following the dimensions and scales of the MLP. Different
reorganizing themselves as triple helix collaborators and aligning the dimensions include culture, industry, policy, markets and user prefer-
production of knowledge assets (inventions, patents, and designs) ences, science and technology. Scales include niche, regime and land-
with industrial capacities for materializing intellectual capital. scape. First, we describe the relevance of the MLP to this topic and
While not currently in existence, manufacturing systems that explain the data collection. The paper then goes on to consider the
employ 3D printing processes to deliver finished goods directly from evidence from stakeholders, exploring the ramifications of a socio-
digital data, eliminating all tooling, would also, by extension, eliminate technical transition for different dimensions of the MLP. Finally, we

Please cite this article as: Birtchnell, T., et al., 3D printing and the third mission: The university in the materialization of intellectual capital,
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.014
4 T. Birtchnell et al. / Technological Forecasting & Social Change xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

assess claims that there is indeed a window of opportunity for 3D print- regime and finally resolving into the macro-scale or landscape—we
ing to emerge as a core technology within university contexts. understand 3D printing as operating at multiple scales with transi-
tional potential manifesting across multiple dimensions in concert.
3.1. The multilevel perspective In particular the way universities influence activities of individual
actors and nation-wide consortia is significant for this research.
For all intents and purposes, we define 3D printing as a single tech-
nology made up of many innovations, similar to the automobile (Geels, 3.2. Innovation systems prototyping with the MLP
2005b) or the aeroplane (Geels, 2006a), and not a ‘sequence of compo-
nent innovations’, as in mass production (Geels, 2006b: 451). Interest- In order to examine the credibility of this apparently pending socio-
ingly, 3D printing's attraction is its simplicity and the closeness of the technical transition around 3D printing, we employed qualitative stake-
consumer to the production process this technology entails. The frame- holder interviews. Precision is mounting in empirical studies of the tri-
work chosen for this study is the MLP because the pathways of past ple helix. An example is a recent case study approach to the empirical
socio-technological transitions have ably been analysed using this heu- analysis of university-industry-government relationships differentiat-
ristic, which offers an approach that goes beyond causality, simple ing between national and regional innovation systems and whether
causes or drivers, to explain complex change. The MLP shows that tran- they are technology-specific or sector-based (Leydesdorff, 2012). In
sitions are non-linear processes made up of the interplay of multiple de- this paper we deploy different ‘visions’ for universities drawing on qual-
velopments at three levels: niches, regimes, and the landscape (Geels, itative data derived from site visits and case studies in line with similar
2012). So far this approach has been resilient to critique in the social sci- efforts to understand innovation systems at alternative scales (Havas,
ences and has its own ontological following (Geels, 2011). 2008). We outline a technological forecasting approach we term ‘inno-
Since its early application to the historical case study of the transi- vation systems prototyping’ in dialogue with strategic and creative
tion from sailing ships to steamships (Geels, 2002), the MLP generally prototyping on 3D printing, logistics and systemic transitions (Gary
features a central framework, which depicts the dynamic interplay of et al., 2015).
different levels on a timeline (Grin, 2008). The framework is a ‘nested Our concern is to understand ‘how’ universities will emerge in socie-
hierarchy’ and an ‘ideal-typical representation’ that is by far the MLP's ties reaching significant levels of ubiquity in 3D printing technologies.
most enduring and popular feature (Geels, 2011). The framework and Graham et al. (2014) identify ‘creative (systems) prototyping’ as particu-
its abstract figures continue to feature in recent applications of the larly appropriate when investigating socio-technical futures. The cross-
MLP including water supply and hygiene in the Netherlands (1850– discipline research team involved in the present study stems from the so-
1930) (Geels, 2005a), the transition from horse-drawn carriage to auto- cial sciences, business, and engineering. This cross-discipline team also
mobile (Geels, 2005b), the shift from propeller to turbojet (1930–1970) enhances the rigour of the investigation, as one of the major critical points
(Geels, 2006a), American factory production (1850–1930) (Geels, for prototyping is that of investigator bias. Graham et al. (2015) for exam-
2006b), rock ‘n’ roll (1930–1970) (Geels, 2007) and low carbon trans- ple, apply the method to develop user-driven approaches to future city
port systems (Geels, 2012). The framework also remains relatively un- design and urban supply chain decision-making. Raven (2014) also
changed in other case studies that cite it, including those on applies the prototyping method to investigate large and highly interde-
sustainable development (Grin et al., 2010), genetically modified organ- pendent infrastructure systems.
isms (Lawhon and Murphy, 2012), the green building sector (Gibbs and In posing a ‘how’ question in our foresight and futures studies study,
O'Neill, 2014; O'Neill and Gibbs, 2013), energy transitions in South we adopt case study-informed scenarios to prototype futures. The
Africa (Baker et al., 2014) and mechanical cooling (Shove et al., 2014). criteria by which the three case studies were chosen include scale of
Elsewhere, unfortunately, the framework's core figure is simplified, los- activity, evidence of 3D printing practices, evidence of university
ing in the process some of its detail (see Kloet et al., 2013). In some cases interaction or engagement and finally maturity of the nation-state's
the (obviously intended) different structuration of the socio-technical manufacturing sector (Öner, 2010). The semi-structured interviews
regime after adjustment to change is jettisoned in favour of an unneces- were organized around a series of questions relating to the dimensions
sary symmetry (see Genus and Coles, 2008; Yuan et al., 2012). In other of the MLP: culture, industry, policy, markets and user preferences, sci-
cases the framework's figure is altered in combinations with other on- ence and technology. Qualitative case studies are well suited for explor-
tologies, such as social practice theory (Hargreaves et al., 2013), mobil- atory research, rich in context and valuable for tracing of processes and
ities theory (Sheller, 2012) or foresight (Auvinen et al., 2014). While causal mechanism (Yin, 1994). This kind of theory building is not orient-
these latter experiments are innovative fusions, the framework be- ed towards general laws or correlations between dependent and
comes unlike the original in character and design sensibility. In this independent variables, but instead aims to uncover the social dy-
paper we utilize the MLP framework in order to examine a socio- namics and mechanisms that underlie certain processes (Bunge,
technical transition around 3D printing. 2004); in our case the mechanisms that link social dynamics to inno-
This paper populates the MLP with case studies on 3D printing to vation journeys in digital fabrication with a strong focus on 3D print-
examine how it is moving beyond its niche in ‘rapid prototyping’ to ing. Our approach follows that of Geels and Verhees (2011) who
ubiquity amongst a wide range of users as recently claimed by applies a similar methodological approach when investigating cul-
Rayna and Struikova in this journal (Rayna and Striukova, 2016). tural legitimacy and framing struggles in innovation journeys. The
3D printing has found support across a range of dimensions: case study is based on multiple data-sources, which allows for trian-
policymakers concerned about the geopolitical consequences of the gulation (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007). Our major source of data
growing offshoring of manufacturing expertise and jobs (Sissons derives from semi-structured interviews with relevant stakeholders
and Thompson, 2012); markets and users interested in new products on site.
and consumer relationships with production (Basiliere et al., 2013); The first case concerned the ‘America Makes’ national program in
cultures of making, customization and digital craft (Lipson and the USA. Site visits within the US involved several organizations affiliat-
Kurman, 2013); science applications of 3D printing in medical and ed with the National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute
laboratory settings (Wallace et al., 2014); technology analysts (NAMII), with its headquarters in Youngstown, Ohio. The site visits
looking for the next trend (Anderson, 2012); and, finally, industry took place in August 2014. The second case involved the regional
scanning the horizon for possible changing supply and demand rela- approach taken by Lancaster University's Product Development Unit
tionships (Cable, 2013). While many MLP investigations are linear in (LPDU) in the UK, which is located in the North West of England. Two
nature over time—that is, conceiving of innovations emerging as site visits were conducted in mid 2014 as well as June 2015, including
niches at the micro-scale before maturing into the meso-scale or company visits with core LPDU partner organizations. The third case

Please cite this article as: Birtchnell, T., et al., 3D printing and the third mission: The university in the materialization of intellectual capital,
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.014
T. Birtchnell et al. / Technological Forecasting & Social Change xxx (2016) xxx–xxx 5

study focused on the local/community approach in the capital of Funded by an initial US$70 million for its set up, America Makes has
Germany. Site visits to the newly and upgraded facilities of the Fablab several foci. A major component of the institute is advanced
Berlin occurred in July 2015. Interview partners ranged from managers research—their technology roadmap aims to tackle industry-wide chal-
and users of the Fablab as well as academics from affiliated Universities. lenges such as better design practices, material feedstock standardiza-
All three centres, the national US initiative termed NAMII, the regional tion, improved processing efficacy and accuracy, and reduction of
approach LPDU, and the local/community attempt Fablab were chosen related manufacturing costs. They also support major initiatives in
as they form an integral part of their local 3D printing value network. training and education aimed at growing the 3D workforce to back ad-
A total of 26 interviews were conducted with senior members of the vanced manufacturing sectors. Additionally, they maintain part of their
respective centres of excellence and accompanying value networks. mission is to accelerate the adoption of 3D printing products seen as a
milestone of success for the industry. America Makes has programs to
increase advocacy as well as support small and medium-sized enter-
4. Prototyping convergence scenarios
prises (SMEs) and start-ups to align with this mission.
One of the questions our research team raised with interviewees
In this section we prototype different scales wherein universities
was how do new members get involved? Membership beyond the
emerge as crucial players in the convergence of the material and knowl-
initial engagement partners is maintained by a tiered fee based struc-
edge economies. Drawing on field site visits by the research team, we
ture ranging from around $US15k for a Silver Supporting member to
abstract current relationships between universities, industry and
$US200k for a Platinum Lead member. Participants that buy-in are of-
government in three countries: the UK, US and Germany. We concur
fered to lead or partake in research and development (R&D) funding op-
that policies, social dynamics and cultures differ across countries; how-
portunities, access to members-only data and America Makes
ever, it is not within the scope of this paper to compare and contrast
intellectual property, usage of facilities for R&D among other aspects.
different regions according to their capacity for innovation. Fablabs
Exact terms and conditions of the arrangements as well as details of
occur in many countries and it is not inconceivable in the future that
the ecosystem of infrastructure are restricted to members.
the UK or Germany could launch a similar national initiative to
In terms of research, since 2014 there have been 31 projects funded.
'America Makes' in the US. We also acknowledge that manufacturing
Most of the 31 are led by or include one or multiple university partners,
does continue to exist in de-industrializing or post-industrial regions
in addition to industrial partners, additive manufacturer equipment and
to different degrees, notably in Germany, which enjoys many niche
material suppliers. Universities play a pivotal role in the institute. They
industries catering to demand for luxury products: automobiles,
are critical in the participation of generating new knowledge through
handcrafted toys and kitchen appliances. The case studies chosen for
research, and serving as access routes to technology. Additionally one
this article instead represent ideal types today and are examples of
of the key activities toward the purpose of increasing the US's global
how the triple helix could evolve at variable scales in the future.
manufacturing competitiveness is by engaging with education institu-
tions and companies to supply education and training in additive
4.1. Macro-scale: America Makes manufacturing technologies to create an adaptive leading workforce.
At the time of the site visit (late 2014) interviewees indicated that
The potential to usher in a ‘third industrial revolution’ has been the overall success of many projects was still uncertain, but were opti-
noted by hands-on makers and policy-makers alike. It is predicted mistic that the work was tackling issues that have limited the larger
that the global industry for 3D printing was worth $4.1 billion in 2014 assimilation of 3D printing technology into large manufacturing pro-
following a 34.9% growth on 2013 (Wohlers Associates, 2015). This cesses, for instance Quality Control and Assurance in the process more
potential has thrown 3D printing into the spotlight from a national per- widely and for final products, more intelligent software, and larger
spective where governments are jostling to lead in technology develop- ranges of useable materials. Based on our interviews there were several
ment in everything from manufacturing competitive advantage to early challenges for the development of a truly collaborative network.
advanced defence superiority. Hence the development of strategic 3D For instance the support by the federal government and defence in-
printing infrastructure and related program has become part of national dustries enabled tighter control and easier funding mechanisms, the
agendas under large pushes for the ‘reshoring’ of manufacturing centre's organization at times did not align with the objectives of the in-
(Blinder, 2006). dividual entity stakeholders; this could be seen as inhibiting an innova-
In our first case study we examine the knowledge dissemination and tion process. Furthermore, a lack of understanding about how individual
social dynamics of the ‘America Makes’ program launched by President members function has both hindered integration and delayed project
Obama. The ‘America Makes’ program (rebranded from the National start dates. Initial setup of the value network took time despite the par-
Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute — NAMII in 2013) was ticipants agreeing to be involved. A major inhibitor was working out
the flagship of a series of eventual institutes in the US rolled out under contractual details, especially around intellectual property with some
the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI) program. universities waiting over a year to officially join. At times the individual
‘America Makes’ focuses on commercializing manufacturing technolo- functions came into conflict with the goals/regulations of creating the
gies through public–private partnerships and is aimed at improving ‘America Makes’ framework. For instance, foreign workers were not
the competitiveness of manufacturing and encouraging investment in allowed to work on projects, which came into conflict with university
the United States. norms and practices. Another difficulty was caused by the emphasis
While headquartered in a nondescript building in Youngtown, Ohio that was placed on sourcing technology from the US (indeed the pro-
the institute is actually a large network consortium of participants that gram has the objective of increasing domestic manufacturing competi-
at an early stage included 50 companies, 28 leading universities, com- tiveness) despite the fact that—in seeking to reduce dependency on
munity colleges and affiliated labs, and 16 other organizations (includ- ‘foreign’ technology—certain countries in the EU and Asia already had
ing industry and economic development groups) located in the region longer-established and more cost-effective products on the market.
known as the ‘Tech Belt’ from Cleveland to Pittsburgh. The institute It was apparent however that the interviewees agreed that the
has a heavy defence agenda, being established and managed by the program was helping to build national support for general US-based
National Center for Defense Manufacturing and Machining (NCDMM). advanced manufacturing and that this could drive innovation beyond
The NCDMM was in turn selected under a broad agency panel from just the 3D printing sector. Core ingredients for enhanced knowledge
the US Department of Defense, Department of Energy, NASA, National dissemination in value networks like openness and trust will require
Science Foundation and the National Institute of Standards and time to establish. In the time since the interviews the membership
Technology. has grown and participation is expanding, particularly beyond the

Please cite this article as: Birtchnell, T., et al., 3D printing and the third mission: The university in the materialization of intellectual capital,
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.014
6 T. Birtchnell et al. / Technological Forecasting & Social Change xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

activity. The LPDU employs a diverse range of additive manufactur-


ing equipment, and utilizes different processes and materials in
order to create parts and assemblies. Its value network has devel-
oped organically over some 13 years and most referrals are by
word of mouth. The network structure may be characterized as
being loose and can be best described as a 'Dandelion' approach
(organically grown over time, knowledge push and pull).
SME interviews reveal a sense of rejuvenation and consensual prog-
ress through regional collaboration. Many of the firms in question were
able to continue legacies that spanned back to before the collapse of
manufacturing in the UK's North West through integrating additive
manufacturing into their pre- and post-production strategies, chiefly
through utilizing customization affordances in order to satisfy client de-
mand for bespoke solutions.
The LPDU is a major knowledge source for the participating mem-
bers and it is perceived to be a respected, trusted, and critical node
Fig. 1. Spider in the Web.
(knowledge supplier) within the network. However, availability of crit-
ical investment capital remains a challenge. The network structure is
technology ‘belt’. 'America Makes' advertises that over 140 members market-driven (involves business-based projects) and heavily relies
participate in regions across the country far as Texas and California. Fur- on collaboration. One interviewee stressed that trust is an important
ther evaluation will examine if the initiatives have achieved milestones factor in motivating regional businesses to seek assistance from univer-
in securing industrial leadership in technology. sities to adopt additive-manufacturing technologies, either in-house or
We characterize the 'America Makes' artificial network structure as a via shared arrangements and facilities.
‘Spider in the Web’ model. The National Additive Manufacturing Inno- LPDU's value network has developed organically over some 13 years.
vation Institute (NAMII) forms the central part of the collaboration Fig. 2 is thus a simplified representation of a value network. The central
(Fig. 1). NAMII represents the central node in an artificially designed element is the advanced engineering and manufacturing cluster that
value network. The power is centralized and lies within NAMII. The en- currently exists in the North West of England. The cluster is made up
tity has greater control over activities that occur within the network of of predominantly SMEs loosely linked and coupled. The left hand side
affiliated companies, universities, community colleges, and not-for- of the diagram represents the supplier base that is supplying the cluster
profit organizations. Funds are allocated based on member collabora- organization with resources such as raw materials, consumables and
tion meaning NAMII is expecting various affiliated entities to apply for services, in order to create value to the customer base (right hand
funding in a collaborative manner. Hence the different entities are side) for consumption. Uniquely in the diagram is the bottom quadrant
interlinked. It became evident while interviewing staff from NAMII representing the LPDU. LPDU is a major knowledge source for the par-
that the institute believes innovation can best occur in a network of or- ticipating cluster members and it is perceived to be a respected, trusted,
ganizations rather than in a single entity. Most knowledge created is and critical node (outsourced knowledge supplier) within the network.
contained within the value network mainly due to the nature of the pro- LPDU functions as a knowledge ‘flywheel’ enhancing practice, using ac-
jects being defence-oriented. ademic resources and deploying them within the cluster. This type of
knowledge transfer is often termed ‘knowledge adaptation’ using the
4.2. Meso-scale: Lancaster Product Development Unit means of joint process/product development, student placement and
direct assistance (Böhme et al., 2014).
The Lancaster Product Development Unit is the outreach team of Additionally, knowledge gets transferred and shared within the
Lancaster University's Engineering Department. The LDPU is currently cluster using the means of courses, workshops, events and conferences.
delivering several major EU funded projects alongside consultancy ser- The network structure is market-driven (involves business-based pro-
vices, the pursuit of research opportunities and internal university gov- jects) and heavily relies on collaboration. LPDU offers two distinct path-
ernance targets. It was initially funded by the European Union with the ways for knowledge to be disseminated; knowledge transfer (courses,
aim of delivering effective knowledge exchanges that increase the up-
take of design and advanced manufacturing technologies regionally.
Collaborators include North Western UK SMEs to global organizations
such as QinetiQ, National Nuclear Laboratory, The Linde Group (former-
ly BOC Plc), Sellafield Nuclear Power Station, Bloodhound Supersonic
Car Programme, BAE Systems, Yorkshire Water, United Utilities and
the UK Department for Transport. Between 2009 and 2013 the LPDU
claims to have provided bespoke design and additive manufacturing
technology expertise to 156 companies, creating over 45 new jobs and
safeguarding over 100 new jobs regionally.
Core funding for the LPDU is the European Regional Development
Fund (ERDF) with some additional funding coming from the Engineer-
ing and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC). Historic funding
has been secured from the North West regional Development Agency
(NWDA), the EU INTERREG IIIC, the European Social Fund (ESF) and
the Higher Education Innovation Fund (HEIF). Moreover, the LPDU
pitches its relationships with industry in five core ways: collaborative
research, student engagement, facilities for research and development,
professional training, and commercialization of intellectual capital. Col-
laborations range from short, small-scale interventions of support ad-
dressing a particular issue to longer, product-development focussed Fig. 2. Dandelion.

Please cite this article as: Birtchnell, T., et al., 3D printing and the third mission: The university in the materialization of intellectual capital,
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.014
T. Birtchnell et al. / Technological Forecasting & Social Change xxx (2016) xxx–xxx 7

workshops, events and conferences); and, knowledge adaptation. Inter- brokerage role further increases engagement, transparency, collabora-
viewees pointed out how a long history of regional manufacturing is a tion and excitement amongst the users and strongly contributes to the
key driver for businesses choosing to employ local staff and other re- positive and open Fablab culture. This culture is underpinned by the
sources, rather than engaging in outsourcing. In short, business ethics Fablab's own club that runs the Fablab entertainment elements such
is perceived to be more important than strictly maintaining the bottom as music, a bar and a lounge, which creates a living room atmosphere.
line. Such an ethical standpoint also drives knowledge dissemination Additionally, the Fablab provides core links to relevant industry and
within the cluster, since members share their knowledge freely and academic partners. The lab just partnered and co-located their offices
openly with the trusted network members. with a local but international operating manufacturer. Prostates, due to
the high levels of customization, are the industry where the application
of 3D printing technology is most matured. The second core industry
4.3. Micro-scale: Berlin Fablab
link is with a globally operating spare-part and consumables provider.
The Fablab has an exclusive agreement with the company and hence
Many communities around the world are currently establishing fab-
provides quick turnaround times for machine maintenance, helping to
rication laboratories (Fablabs) that are accessible to the public and per-
keep machine down time to a minimum. An interesting find are the
ceived as a community resource (Gershenfeld, 2005). Fablabs can be
links with the universities. The Fablab currently operates with two core
defined as locally accessible facilities that democratize innovation and
links. One collaborator is a highly ranked engineering research institute.
invention by providing access to physical and digital fabrication tools
This link helps the Fablab to stay current and up to date with technolog-
for no, or little, profit. Fablabs share an evolving inventory of core capa-
ical developments. The second link is with a local university and here, in
bilities to make (almost) anything, allowing people and projects to be
particular, is their start-up accelerator; allowing start-ups access to the
collaborative.
latest digital fabrication technology. These core links give the Fablab
For our third case study we investigate knowledge dissemination
credibility beyond relevance, and moreover a pathway to entrepreneur-
and social dynamics in one of the largest Fablabs in central Europe,
ship. The current facilities host start-up hot desks for early entrepreneurs
where our research team conducted a site visit. The Berlin Fablab is an
who require permanent access to the infrastructure.
independent for-profit organization with strong links to both industry
The current equipment of the Fablab ranges from 3D printers to laser
and the university sector. The users range from children, hobbyists
and vinyl cutters, CNC mills, an electro lab and a textile lab. Surprisingly,
and tinkerers to SMEs, academics and independent educationalists.
the 3D printers are actually not the most utilized machines but rather
There is much diversity in motivations for accessing this facility. Intel-
the ‘hype’ drawing card to spark interest in the local community.
lectual stimulation and the desire to craft are both core compulsions.
SMEs are utilizing the Fablab for product development work. Hence,
As well, a major driver for involvement in the Berlin Fablab is altruism.
the most utilized machines at this point are the CNC mills. An interesting
People wish to share their knowledge away from formal educational
remark was made by one of the founders who pointed out that the cur-
settings in a companionable way at the same time expanding their so-
rent Fablab equipment is hardly enough to meaningfully engage with
cial networks.
SMEs and that a further expansion is required in order to keep up
Aside from altruistic users, the largest group by far is SMEs (up
with increasing machine demands.
to 80% of clients) who utilize the Fablab predominantly for rapid
Fig. 3 provides an overview of the knowledge dissemination prac-
prototyping. The founders of the Fablab perceive themselves as equip-
tices of the Fablab. The dotted line represents a weak link and the flow
ment ‘hardware’ providers with the main focus on democratizing tech-
of knowledge and the full line a strong link. The central element in the
nological machinery. While this is the case, this is not the whole story.
figure is the Fablab itself and the members/users. Therefore this ap-
When investigating the current operation and interviewing some of
proach is termed the ‘Apple Tree’ where the tree itself reflects the infra-
the key clients it became evident that the Fablab's role goes beyond
structure of the Fablab and the individual apples potential users. The
hardware provision and includes as well knowledge brokerage, similar
Fablab stays up to date with digital fabrication innovations through
to a university's core competencies.
loose university engagement (see quadrant at the bottom of the figure).
In public engagement the Fablab is entirely unlike a university. The
The dotted line visualizes the weak connection. A stronger knowledge
Berlin Fablab created its own system that allows users to operate its
source for staff members is the partner organization (manufacturer) lo-
technologies once an in-depth introductory course has been completed.
cated at the top of the diagram and also some of their core suppliers (left
No external enrolment, accreditation or qualification is necessary to
hand side of the diagram) who form an integral part of the Fablab.
effectively gain complete access to the workshop machinery. The Fablab
Newly obtained and applicable digital fabrication knowledge flows
staff members provide the initial overview of the machine; however,
both ways between entities. Fablab staff members pass knowledge on
deeper knowledge is obtained through the practice of ‘peer-production’,
to users predominantly via group workshops; hence, the dotted line be-
which links and connects advanced users with beginners. Fablab staff
tween Fablab staff and the various users/members. However, the Fablab
members are taking on a very active role connecting and matching
takes on an active knowledge brokerage role by actively matching indi-
users at different skill levels on different machine. Hence, the Fablab
vidual user knowledge demand with individual user knowledge capa-
functions what is best described as a knowledge broker. This knowledge
bility. Peer to peer learning is the strongest form of knowledge
dissemination. This knowledge slowly filters down into the SME, start-
up and maker communities. Once the digital fabrication knowledge ma-
tures and ‘ripens’, users and companies are likely to move on and invest
in their own facilities and harvest the cost benefit that comes with oper-
ating their own laboratories.

5. Discussion

Our main argument in this paper was that due to the unique limita-
tions and advantages of 3D printing the ubiquity of the technology will
be ‘disruptive’ and ‘revolutionary’ for the material and the knowledge
economies. By extension this will have a momentous impact upon the
university and its primary asset: intellectual capital. We showed that
Fig. 3. Apple Tree. the emergence of 3D printing would involve a convergence of the

Please cite this article as: Birtchnell, T., et al., 3D printing and the third mission: The university in the materialization of intellectual capital,
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.014
8 T. Birtchnell et al. / Technological Forecasting & Social Change xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

knowledge and material economies within distributed nodal clus- where advice, facilitation and access to industrial-scale technologies
ters. The key uncertainty going forward is the scale of universities' provide stabilization and ultimately new configurations that feed into
involvement. The university—currently only a way station for knowl- adjustments in the regime's dimensions.
edge and knowledge workers in its core business—will emerge as a The window of opportunity in the regime opens up in response to
core hub of the newly converged material and knowledge econo- viable business models emerging from the Dandelion, previously in-
mies. By harnessing their existing activities in 3D printing and capi- cubated in the Apple Tree, and through pressure from the Spider in
talizing on their existing regional presence as local providers of the Web across multiple dimensions, of which six are addressed
employment, investment and growth, universities stand to realize here. Government and industry consortia in the Spider in the Web
their third mission in a presently unforeseen way. In seeking to de- lobby policymakers and markets for investment, scientific research
fine the ideal structural design that can most effectively disseminate and cultural acceptance of 3D printing technologies. Spider in the
innovation knowledge into a value network, the purpose of this Web also externally influences the Apple Tree network through pro-
study was to begin to understand the degree of success of different viding research staff and students, and their creativity and intellec-
approaches to disseminating innovation knowledge. Findings from tual property, for participation in small networks of actors. An issue
this qualitative field research with three case studies fundamentally unresolved in Fig. 4 is time and the founding of the case studies
differing in their design reveals how universities' actions are aimed does not indicate the stage of their involvement. We suspect that fur-
at enhancing knowledge dissemination in local value networks. ther case studies through quantitative analysis would allow general-
The conceptual framework for this paper was the MLP. Bringing the izations to be made about timing.
three case studies together we foreground 3D printing as a core technol-
ogy enabling universities to meet their expectations of a third mission at 6. Conclusion
different scales and even perhaps in coordination between them. In
order to provide an overarching perspective we revised a figure from In this paper we have shown that universities are core nodes in the
the MLP framework and integrated the case studies into its heuristic knowledge economy and also interface in important ways with the
(Fig. 4). material economy. The so-called third mission of the university has
Overall, niches emerging from small networks of actors such as the become, in effect, to be a business rather than simply a supplier of voca-
Apple Tree serve as incubators with tacit and informal linkages to uni- tional graduates in the first instance and intellectual capital in the sec-
versities through key individuals with tertiary support providing vision ond. In the twenty-first century, social engagement has become the
and inceptive links and inspiration. Successful start-ups with niche- bread-and-butter of higher education institutions, which are ever
innovations in 3D printing align with universities in the Dandelion more instrumental in ‘knowledge transfer’, education for employment,

Fig. 4. Multilevel perspective on transitions (adapted from (Geels, 2012: 474)).

Please cite this article as: Birtchnell, T., et al., 3D printing and the third mission: The university in the materialization of intellectual capital,
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.014
T. Birtchnell et al. / Technological Forecasting & Social Change xxx (2016) xxx–xxx 9

and community service (Chantler, 2014). Operating as linchpins of Basiliere, P., Shah, Z., Li, Y., 2013. Forecast: 3D Printers, Worldwide, 2013. http://www.
gartner.com/doc/2598122/forecast-d-printers-worldwide-.
regional economies universities exercise closeness to local actors Baumers, M., Dickens, P., Tuck, C., Hague, R., 2016. The cost of additive manufacturing:
(e.g., non-governmental Organizations, SMEs, multinational corpora- machine productivity, economies of scale and technology-push. Technol. Forecast.
tions, or councils) unlike the purview of any other institution. At the Soc. Chang. 102, 193–201.
Berman, B., 2012. 3-D printing: the new industrial revolution. Bus. Horiz. 55, 155–162.
same time as local engagement, tertiary institutions operate at a global Birtchnell, T., Urry, J., 2012. Fabricating futures and the movement of objects. Mobilities 8,
scale through competition on league tables, wide-ranging research 388–405.
agendas and ‘internationalization’ policies and campaigns, in part to Birtchnell, T., Urry, J., 2015. The mobilities and post-mobilities of cargo. Consum. Mark.
Cult. 18, 25–38.
capture the widest student cohort as possible. Blinder, A.S., 2006. Offshoring: The Next Industrial Revolution? Foreign Affairs (25
The ‘America Makes’ initiative is a major push by the US government November)
to innovate parts of its national manufacturing competitiveness. How- Böhme, T., Deakins, E., Pepper, M., Towill, D., 2014. Systems engineering effective supply
chain innovations. Int. J. Prod. Res. 52, 6518–6537.
ever its artificially imposed network structure originally struggled due
Bosqué, C., 2015. What are you printing? Ambivalent emancipation by 3D printing. Rapid
to differences in shareholder expectations and collaborative initiatives. Prototyp. J. 21 (nnull).
In contrast, the LPDU has grown organically as an organization over Bunge, M., 2004. How does it work? The search for explanatory mechanisms. Philos. Soc.
the past 13 years into a respected, trusted, and critical node within the Sci. 34, 182–210.
Cable, V., 2013. £14.7 million boost for innovative 3D printing projects. http://www.gov.
local value network. The LPDU initiative is a ‘pull’ (market demand ori- uk/government/news/147-million-boost-for-innovative-3d-printing-projects.
entated) initiative, which at times reduces the impact of innovation Chantler, A., 2014. The ivory tower revisited. Discourse Stud. Cult. Polit. Educ. 1–15.
when it is not in demand by the market. Interests in peer-production D'Aveni, R., 2015. The 3-D printing revolution. Harv. Bus. Rev. (May).
D'Aveni, R.A., 2013. 3-D printing will change the world. Harv. Bus. Rev.
and cultures of making loosely bind the Berlin Fablab. There are only Dolfsma, W., Leydesdorff, L., 2009. Lock-in and break-out from technological trajectories:
tacit links to universities, which act as incubators and supporters of rad- modeling and policy implications. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 76, 932–941.
ical, unorthodox and unconventional knowledge products only inter- Eisenhardt, K.M., Graebner, M.E., 2007. Theory building from cases: opportunities and
challenges. Acad. Manag. J. 50, 25–32.
mittently suitable for wealth creation. Yet, examples exist of novelties Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., Terra, B.R.C., 2000. The future of the university
emerging from left of field spaces of innovation and the Fablab is a facil- and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial para-
itator of serendipitous collaborations. digm. Res. Policy 29, 313–330.
Foresight, 2010. Technology and Innovation Futures: UK Growth Opportunities for the
In essence, all three case studies exhibit a design sciences approach 2020s. Foresight Horizon Scanning Centre, London.
to knowledge adaptation, in which practitioners make sense of theory Gansky, L., 2015. Interdependence: a manifesto for our urban future, together. Archit. Des.
by modifying, extending and reconstructing scientific knowledge with- 85, 80–83.
Gary, G., Rashid, M., Eve, C., 2015. Exploring future cityscapes through urban logistics
in their organizations to legitimize their courses of action. The study also
prototyping: a technical viewpoint. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 20, 341–352.
confirms that both trust and collaboration within innovation networks Gebler, M., Schoot Uiterkamp, A.J.M., Visser, C., 2014. A global sustainability perspective
are fundamentally important. However, none of the case approaches on 3D printing technologies. Energy Policy 74, 158–167.
are entirely compelling and it is likely that their true potential will Geels, F.W., 2002. Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a
multi-level perspective and a case-study. Res. Policy 31, 1257–1274.
only be revealed over time, as is the case with most foresight modelling. Geels, F.W., 2005a. Co-evolution of technology and society: the transition in water supply
What our case studies show is that there is increasing urgency in gover- and personal hygiene in the Netherlands (1850–1930)—a case study in multi-level
nance to profit from the materialization of knowledge in order to realize perspective. Technol. Soc. 27, 363–397.
Geels, F.W., 2005b. The dynamics of transitions in socio-technical systems: A multi-level
wealth creation from intellectual capital to the same degree as in indus- analysis of the transition pathway from horse-drawn carriages to automobiles
try today. In the process of consolidating on intellectual capital through (1860–1930). Tech. Anal. Strat. Manag. 17, 445–476.
becoming 3D printing hotbeds as a facet of their society-facing personas Geels, F.W., 2006a. Co-evolutionary and multi-level dynamics in transitions: the transfor-
mation of aviation systems and the shift from propeller to turbojet (1930–1970).
universities could inch ever closer to bridging the divide between the Technovation 26, 999–1016.
material and knowledge economies. In a future system oriented around Geels, F.W., 2006b. Major system change through stepwise reconfiguration: a multi-level
3D printing there is further scope for universities to foster a cradle-to- analysis of the transformation of American factory production (1850–1930). Technol.
Soc. 28, 445–476.
grave approach to intellectual capital by becoming manufacturing, Geels, F.W., 2007. Analysing the breakthrough of rock ‘n’ roll (1930–1970) multi-regime
freight and retail hubs in their own right. It is clear from this study interaction and reconfiguration in the multi-level perspective. Technol. Forecast. Soc.
that future initiatives to accelerate the diffusion of innovation knowl- Chang. 74, 1411–1431.
Geels, F.W., 2011. The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: responses to
edge will need to be carefully crafted in order both to take advantage
seven criticisms. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 1, 24–40.
of any existing well-functioning value network and establish a more ef- Geels, F.W., 2012. A socio-technical analysis of low-carbon transitions: introducing the
fective knowledge hub. multi-level perspective into transport studies. J. Transp. Geogr. 24, 471–482.
Geels, F.W., Verhees, B., 2011. Cultural legitimacy and framing struggles in innovation
journeys: a cultural-performative perspective and a case study of Dutch nuclear en-
Acknowledgement ergy (1945–1986). Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 78, 910–930.
Genus, A., Coles, A.-M., 2008. Rethinking the multi-level perspective of technological tran-
sitions. Res. Policy 37, 1436–1445.
We wish to thank Professors Chris Gibson and Geoff Spinks and the Gershenfeld, N., 2005. Fab: The Coming Revolution on Your Desktop—From Personal
UOW Global Challenges Program, NAMII and the 'America Makes' pro- Computers to Personal Fabrication. Basic Books, New York.
gram, and Dr Allan Rennie and the LPDU at Lancaster University. Sup- Gibbs, D., O'Neill, K., 2014. Rethinking sociotechnical transitions and green entrepreneur-
ship: the potential for transformative change in the green building sector. Environ.
port was also received from the Australian Research Council (ARC) Plan. A 46, 1088–1107.
DP160100979. Graham, G., Greenhill, A., Callaghan, V., 2014. Technological forecasting and social change
special section: creative prototyping. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 84, 1–4.
Graham, G., Mehmood, R., Coles, E., 2015. Exploring future cityscapes through urban
References logistics prototyping: a technical viewpoint. 20, 341–-352.
Gress, D.R., Kalafsky, R.V., 2015. Geographies of production in 3D: theoretical and research
Amis, J., Silk, M.L., 2010. Transnational organization and symbolic production: creating implications stemming from additive manufacturing. Geoforum 60, 43–52.
and managing a global brand. Consum. Mark. Cult. 13, 159–179. Grin, J., Rotmans, J., Schot, J., 2010. Transitions to Sustainable Development: New Direc-
Anderson, C., 2012. Makers: The New Industrial Revolution. Random House, New York. tions in the Study of Long Term Transformative Change. Routledge, Abingdon.
Auvinen, H., Ruutu, S., Tuominen, A., Ahlqvist, T., Oksanen, J., 2014. Process supporting Grin, J., 2008. The Multi-level Perspective and Design of System Innovations. In: van den
strategic decision-making in systemic transitions. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. Bergh, J.C.J., Bruinsma, F.R. (Eds.), Managing the Transition to Renewable Energy:
Bak, D., 2003. Rapid prototyping or rapid production? 3D printing processes move indus- Theory and Practice from Local, Regional and Macro Perspectives. Edward Elgar
try towards the latter. Assem. Autom. 23, 340–345. Publishing, Northampton, pp. 47–80.
Baker, L., Newell, P., Phillips, J., 2014. The political economy of energy transitions: the case Groenendyk, M., Gallant, R., 2013. 3D printing and scanning at the Dalhousie University
of South Africa. New Pol. Econ. 1-28. Libraries: a pilot project. Libr. Hi Tech. 31, 34–41.
Banerjee, S., 2015. "3D Printing: Are You Ready for the New Decentralized Industrial Revo- Guan, J., Zhao, Q., 2013. The impact of university–industry collaboration networks on
lution? http://www.wired.com/insights/2015/02/3d-printing-decentralized-industrial- innovation in nanobiopharmaceuticals. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 80,
revolution/ 1271–1286.

Please cite this article as: Birtchnell, T., et al., 3D printing and the third mission: The university in the materialization of intellectual capital,
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.014
10 T. Birtchnell et al. / Technological Forecasting & Social Change xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

Hargreaves, T., Longhurst, N., Seyfang, G., 2013. Up, down, round and round: connecting Scalfani, V.F., Sahib, J., 2013. A Model for Managing 3D Printing Services in Academic
regimes and practices in innovation for sustainability. Environ. Plan. A 45, 402–420. Libraries. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, p. 72.
Havas, A., 2008. Devising futures for universities in a multi-level structure: a methodolog- Sheller, M., 2012. The Emergence of New Cultures of Mobility: Stability, Openings, and
ical experiment. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 75, 558–582. Prospects. In: Geels, F.W., Kemp, R., Dudley, G., Lyons, G. (Eds.), Automobility in
Holweg, M., 2015. The limits of 3D printing. Harv. Bus. Rev. Transition? A Socio-Technical Analysis of Sustainable Transport. Routledge, London,
Hopkinson, N., Hague, R.J.M., Dickens, P.M., 2006. Introduction to Rapid Manufacturing. pp. 180–202.
In: Hopkinson, N., Hague, R.J.M. (Eds.), Rapid Manufacturing: an Industrial Revolution Shove, E., Walker, G., Brown, S., 2014. Transnational transitions: the diffusion and integra-
for the Digital Age. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, pp. 1–4. tion of mechanical cooling. Urban Stud. 51, 1506–1519.
Hudson, D., 2014. The President Talks Manufacturing and Innovation at TechShop Sims, R., Schaeffer, R., Creutzig, F., Cruz-Núñez, X., D'Agosto, M., Dimitriu, D., Figueroa
Pittsburgh. https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2014/06/18/president-speaks- Meza, M.J., Fulton, L., Kobayashi, S., Lah, O., McKinnon, A., Newman, P., Ouyang, M.,
manufacturing-and-innovation-techshop-pittsburgh. Schauer, J.J., Sperling, D., Tiwari, G., Edenhofer, O., Pichs-Madruga, R., Sokona, Y.,
Intellectual Property Office, 2013. 3D Printing: a Patent Overview. UK Government, Farahani, E., Kadner, S., Seyboth, K., Adler, A., Baum, I., Brunner, S., Eickemeier, P.,
Newport. Kriemann, B., Savolainen, J., Schlömer, S., von Stechow, C., Zwickel, T., Minx, J.C.,
Kietzmann, J., Pitt, L., Berthon, P., 2015. Disruptions, decisions, and destinations: enter the 2014. Transport. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution
age of 3-D printing and additive manufacturing. Bus. Horiz. 58, 209–215. of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental
Kloet, R.R., Hessels, L.K., Zweekhorst, M.B.M., Broerse, J.E.W., de Cock, Buning T., 2013. Un- Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 599–670.
derstanding constraints in the dynamics of a research programme intended as a Sissons, A., Thompson, S., 2012. Three Dimensional Policy: Why Britain Needs a Policy
niche innovation. Sci. Public Policy 40, 206–218. Framework for 3D. Big Innovation Centre, London.
Laredo, P., 2007. Revisiting the third mission of universities: toward a renewed categori- Söderberg, J., 2014. Reproducing wealth without money, one 3D printer at a time: the
zation of university activities? High. Educ. Policy 20, 441–456. cunning of instrumental reason. J. Peer Prod. 1-10.
Lawhon, M., Murphy, J.T., 2012. Socio-technical regimes and sustainability transitions: in- Tien, J., 2012. The next industrial revolution: integrated services and goods. J. Syst. Sci.
sights from political ecology. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 36, 354–378. Syst. Eng. 1-40.
Leydesdorff, L., 1996. Luhmann's sociological theory: its operationalization and future Triple Helix Research Group, 2014. The Triple Helix Concept. http://triplehelix.stanford.
perspectives. Soc. Sci. Inf. 35, 283–306. edu/3helix_concept.
Leydesdorff, L., 2012. The triple helix, quadruple helix, …, and an N-tuple of helices: Tucker, K., Tucker, D., Eastham, J., Gibson, E., Varma, S., Daim, T., 2014. Network based
explanatory models for analyzing the knowledge-based economy? J. Knowl. Econ. technology roadmapping for future markets: case of 3D printing. Technol. Invest. 5,
3, 25–35. 137–156.
Leydesdorff, L., Etzkowitz, H., 1998. Triple helix of innovation: introduction. Sci. Public Urry, J., 2014. Offshoring. Polity, Cambridge.
Policy 25, 358–364. Vavakova, B., 1998. The new social contract between governments, universities and
Lipson, H., Kurman, M., 2013. Fabricated: the New World of 3D Printing. Wiley, society: has the old one failed? Minerva 36, 209–228.
Chichester. Wallace, G.G., Cornock, R., O'Connell, C.D., Beirne, S., Dodds, S., Gilbert, F., 2014. 3D
Moilanen, J., Vadén, T., 2013. 3D printing community and emerging practices of peer pro- Bioprinting: Printing Parts for Bodies. Creativist, San Francisco.
duction. First Monday 18. Weller, C., Kleer, R., Piller, F.T., 2015. Economic implications of 3D printing: market struc-
Mokhtarian, P.L., 1988. An empirical evaluation of the travel impacts of teleconferencing. ture models in light of additive manufacturing revisited. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 164, 43–56.
Transp. Res. A Gen. 22, 283–289. Wohlers Associates, 2015, "Wohlers Report 2015 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing
Mokhtarian, P.L., 2002. Telecommunications and travel: the case for complementarity. State of the Industry Annual Worldwide Progress Report ", (Wohlers Associates, Inc.,
J. Ind. Ecol. 6, 43–57. Colorado).
Neely, E.L., 2015. The risks of revolution: ethical dilemmas in 3D printing from a US per- Wong, K.V., Hernandez, A., 2012. A review of additive manufacturing. ISRN Mech. Eng.
spective. Sci. Eng. Ethics 1-13. 2012, 10.
O'Neill, K.J., Gibbs, D.C., 2013. Towards a sustainable economy? socio-technical transitions Yin, R.K., 1994. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Sage Publications, Thousand
in the green building sector. Local Environ. 19, 572–590. Oaks.
Öner, M.A., 2010. On theory building in foresight and futures studies: a discussion note. Yuan, J., Xu, Y., Hu, Z., 2012. Delivering power system transition in China. Energy Policy
Futures 42, 1019–1030. 50, 751–772.
Ozcan, S., Islam, N., 2014. Collaborative networks and technology clusters — the case of
nanowire. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 82, 115–131.
Dr Thomas Birtchnell is currently a Senior Lecturer in Geography and Sustainable Com-
Phillips, F., 1998. University–industry partnerships in management research. Technol.
munities at the University of Wollongong. Formerly he was a Postdoctoral Research Asso-
Forecast. Soc. Chang. 57, 257–260.
ciate at Lancaster University in the UK. His research project examined the past and future
Phillips, G.E.F., Eto, M., 1998. Revitalizing university research and its contribution to soci-
impacts of 3D printing on transport and society. His latest book is A New Industrial Future?
ety: a conference at the tsukuba advanced research alliance. Technol. Forecast. Soc.
3D Printing and the Reconfiguring of Production, Distribution and Consumption (London:
Chang. 57, 205–209.
Routledge 2016) co-authored with John Urry.
Potstada, M., Zybura, J., 2014. The role of context in science fiction prototyping: the digital
industrial revolution. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 84, 101–114.
Dr Tillmann Böhme is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Wollongong (Sydney Busi-
Pryor, S., 2014. Implementing a 3D printing service in an academic library. J. Libr. Adm. 54,
ness School). His particular research interest is supply chain maturity in practice; more
1–10.
specifically the human, relationship, and cultural aspects of supply chain management
Raby, M., 2012. 3D Printing Market to Hit $3 Billion by 2018. http://www.slashgear.com/
and the development of potential pathways to enhancement. Recently, he started to inves-
3d-printing-market-to-hit-3-billion-by-2018-23239870/.
tigate innovation capabilities within supply chains; in particular the uptake of additive
Ratto, M., Ree, R., 2012. Materializing information: 3D printing and social change. First
manufacturing capabilities and its supply chain impact.
Monday 17.
Raven, P.G., 2014. The future's four quarters: proposing a quadrant methodology for stra-
Dr Robert Gorkin is a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Wollongong and Strate-
tegic prototyping in infrastructural contexts. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 84,
gic Development Officer for the ARC Centre of Excellence for Electromaterials Science
115–130.
(ACES). His background includes working on four continents with research and project
Rayna, T., Striukova, L., 2016. From rapid prototyping to home fabrication: how 3D print-
management experience in Advancing Manufacturing including micro/nanofabrication,
ing is changing business model innovation. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 102,
3D printing, and emerging materials. He is currently working on 3D Bioprinting and
214–224.
new business models around Additive Manufacturing and Graphene Engineering.
Ritzer, G., Jurgenson, N., 2010. Production, consumption, prosumption: the nature of
capitalism in the age of the digital ‘Prosumer’. J. Consum. Cult. 10, 13–36.

Please cite this article as: Birtchnell, T., et al., 3D printing and the third mission: The university in the materialization of intellectual capital,
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.014

You might also like